Temporal Trends, Outcomes, and Predictors of Next-Day Discharge and Readmission Following Uncomplicated Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Next-day discharge (NDD) outcomes following uncomplicated self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement have not been studied. Here, we compare readmission rates and clinical outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD transcatheter aortic valve replacement with Evolut. METHODS AND RESULTS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry patients (n=29 597) undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding supra-annular valves (Evolut R, PRO, and PRO+) from July 2019 to June 2021 were stratified by postprocedure length of stay: ≤1 day (NDD) versus >1 day (non-NDD). Propensity score matching was used to compare risk adjusted 30-day readmission rates and 1-year outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD, and multivariable regression to determine predictors of NDD and readmission. Between the first and last calendar quarter, the rate of NDD increased from 45.4% to 62.1% and median length of stay decreased from 2 days to 1. Propensity score matching produced relatively well-matched NDD and non-NDD cohorts (n=10 549 each). After matching, NDD was associated with lower 30-day readmission rates (6.3% versus 8.4%; P<0.001) and 1-year adverse outcomes (death, 7.0% versus 9.3%; life threatening/major bleeding, 1.6% versus 3.4%; new permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 3.6 versus 11.0%; [all P<0.001]). Predictors of NDD included non-Hispanic ethnicity, preexisting permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and previous surgical aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing uncomplicated self-expanding Evolut transcatheter aortic valve replacement are discharged the next day. This study found that NDD can be predicted from baseline patient characteristics and was associated with favorable 30-day and 1-year outcomes, including low rates of permanent pacemaker implantation and readmission.

Toripalimab, a therapeutic monoclonal anti-PD-1 antibody with high binding affinity to PD-1 and enhanced potency to activate human T cells.

Over the past decade, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors that target programmed death-1 (PD-1) have demonstrated significant clinical benefit particularly in patients with PD-L1 expressing tumors. Toripalimab is a humanized anti-PD-1 antibody, approved by FDA for first-line treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in combination with chemotherapy. In a post hoc analysis of phase 3 studies, toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy improved overall survival irrespective of PD-L1 status in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (JUPITER-02), advanced non-small cell lung cancer (CHOICE-01) and advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (JUPITER-06). On further characterization, we determined that toripalimab is molecularly and functionally differentiated from pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 mAb approved previously for treating a wide spectrum of tumors. Toripalimab, which binds the FG loop of PD-1, has 12-fold higher binding affinity to PD-1 than pembrolizumab and promotes significantly more Th1- and myeloid-derived inflammatory cytokine responses in healthy human PBMCs in vitro. In an ex vivo system employing dissociated tumor cells from treatment naïve non-small cell lung cancer patients, toripalimab induced several unique genes in IFN-γ and immune cell pathways, showed different kinetics of activation and significantly enhanced IFN-γ signature. Additionally, binding of toripalimab to PD-1 induced lower levels of SHP1 and SHP2 recruitment, the negative regulators of T cell activation, in Jurkat T cells ectopically expressing PD-1. Taken together, these data demonstrate that toripalimab is a potent anti-PD-1 antibody with high affinity PD-1 binding, strong functional attributes and demonstrated clinical activity that encourage its continued clinical investigation in several types of cancer.

Toripalimab Plus Chemotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: The JUPITER-02 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are currently no therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Gemcitabine-cisplatin is the current standard of care for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic NPC (RM-NPC). Objective: To determine whether toripalimab in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin will significantly improve progression-free survival and overall survival as first-line treatment for RM-NPC, compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: JUPITER-02 is an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase 3 study conducted in NPC-endemic regions, including mainland China, Taiwan, and Singapore. From November 10, 2018, to October 20, 2019, 289 patients with RM-NPC with no prior systemic chemotherapy in the RM setting were enrolled from 35 participating centers. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab (240 mg [n = 146]) or placebo (n = 143) in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin for up to 6 cycles, followed by maintenance with toripalimab or placebo until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or completion of 2 years of treatment. Main Outcome: Progression-free survival as assessed by a blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival assessed by investigator, duration of response, and safety. Results: Among the 289 patients enrolled (median age, 46 [IQR, 38-53 years; 17% female), at the final progression-free survival analysis, toripalimab treatment had a significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo (median, 21.4 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.73]). With a median survival follow-up of 36.0 months, a significant improvement in overall survival was identified with toripalimab over placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.45-0.89]; 2-sided P = .008). The median overall survival was not reached in the toripalimab group, while it was 33.7 months in the placebo group. A consistent effect on overall survival, favoring toripalimab, was found in subgroups with high and low PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression. The incidence of all adverse events, grade 3 or greater adverse events, and fatal adverse events were similar between the 2 groups. However, adverse events leading to discontinuation of toripalimab or placebo (11.6% vs 4.9%), immune-related adverse events (54.1% vs 21.7%), and grade 3 or greater immune-related adverse events (9.6% vs 1.4%) were more frequent in the toripalimab group. Conclusions and Relevance: The addition of toripalimab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for RM-NPC provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival and overall survival benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, with a manageable safety profile. These findings support the use of toripalimab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin as the new standard of care for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581786.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Patient Care Improvements; It Takes a Team.

Team-based care has been recommended by numerous cardiovascular organizations involving the treatment of valvular heart disease. Utilization of the cardiovascular team (CVT) in valvular programs has been discussed but there is a paucity of data involving team roles, backgrounds, or expectations. This article will describe a single health system and the roles of the CVT involved in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) program.

Same-Day Discharge Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Multicenter PROTECT TAVR Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of same-day discharge (SDD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) during the COVID-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed significant stress on health care systems worldwide. SDD in highly selected TAVR patients can facilitate the provision of essential cardiovascular care while managing competing COVID-19 resource demands. METHODS: Patient selection for SDD was at the discretion of the local multidisciplinary heart team, across 7 international sites. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, all-cause readmission, major vascular complications, and new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. RESULTS: From March 2020 to August 2021, 124 of 2,100 patients who underwent elective transfemoral TAVR were selected for SDD. The average age was 78.9 ± 7.8 years, the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.4 (IQR: 1.4-4.2), and 32.3% (n = 40) had preexisting PPMs. There were no major vascular complications, strokes, or deaths during the index admission. One patient (0.8%) required PPM implantation for complete heart block and was discharged the same day. No patient required a PPM between discharge home and 30-day follow-up. The composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, all-cause readmission, major vascular complications, and new PPM at 30 days occurred in 5.7% patients (n = 6 of 106). CONCLUSIONS: SDD post-TAVR is safe and feasible in selected patients at low risk for adverse clinical events postdischarge. This strategy may have a potential role in highly selected patients even when the COVID-19 pandemic abates.

Safety, Efficacy, and Biomarker Analysis of Toripalimab in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results from a Multicenter Phase II Trial POLARIS-03.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy offers a second-line option for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) who failed standard therapy, but the biomarkers for predicting response remain to be explored. This study aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and correlative biomarker of toripalimab in patients with previously treated mUC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mUC received toripalimab 3 mg/kg Q2W. Clinical response was assessed every 8 weeks by an independent review committee per RECIST v1.1. Tumor PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and other biomarkers were evaluated. RESULTS: Among the intention-to-treat population (n = 151), 85% of the patients experienced treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) and 20% experienced grade 3 and above TRAE. The objective response rate (ORR) was 26% with a disease control rate (DCR) of 45%. The median duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 19.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 13.9-not estimable], 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.6), and 14.4 months (95% CI, 9.3-23.1), respectively. Both PD-L1+ and TMB-high (10 mutations/Mb as the cutoff) patients had better ORR than PD-L1- patients (42% vs. 17%, P = 0.002) and TMB-low patients (48% vs. 22%, P = 0.014), respectively. The TMB-high group also showed better PFS (12.9 vs. 1.8 months, P < 0.001) and OS (not reached versus 10.0 months, P = 0.018) than the TMB-low group. CONCLUSIONS: Toripalimab has demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in the second-line treatment of mUC with a manageable safety profile. PD-L1 expression and TMB were two independent biomarkers in the study.

Flat dose regimen of toripalimab based on model-informed drug development approach.

Introduction: Flat dosing regimen has recently been approved for programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors including toripalimab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab. The objective of this study is to provide pharmacological evidence for a flat dosing regimen of toripalimab by assessing the efficacy and safety profile of a 240 mg Q3W flat dose relative to the currently approved 3 mg/kg Q2W. Methods: A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model was established based on 1,014 evaluable patients in 13 clinical studies. The exposure-objective response rate (ORR, n = 234) and exposure-safety (n = 152) analyses were performed by logistic regression. Three safety endpoints including grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs), treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were evaluated. Progression-free survival (PFS, n = 234) was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazard model with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Results: The PK profiles of toripalimab are best described by a two-compartment model with time-varying clearance characterized by a sigmoidal maximum effect (Emax) function. Simulations for the first dose and steady-state exposures for the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen were comparable to those for the 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen with 95% exposure coverage ranging from 88% to 96%. The exposure-safety analysis showed that the probability of an adverse event occurring did not increase with increases in toripalimab exposure. A flat exposure-response relationship for ORR was identified. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that exposure was a predictor for PFS; however, no difference in treatment benefit was demonstrated across exposure quantiles using a Cox proportional hazard model. Discussion: This study revealed that toripalimab exposure of 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen. The safety and efficacy E-R results of 240 mg Q3W is flat. Hence, the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen is determined to be a preferred therapeutic dosage for toripalimab due to the convenience of flat dose.

Toripalimab or placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a multicenter randomized phase 3 trial.

Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy is the standard first-line systemic treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC). In this international, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03581786), 289 patients with RM-NPC and no previous chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease were randomized (1/1) to receive either toripalimab, a monoclonal antibody against human programmed death-1 (PD-1), or placebo in combination with GP every 3 weeks for up to six cycles, followed by monotherapy with toripalimab or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by a blinded independent review committee according to RECIST v.1.1. At the prespecified interim PFS analysis, a significant improvement in PFS was detected in the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm: median PFS of 11.7 versus 8.0 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.74), P = 0.0003. An improvement in PFS was observed across key subgroups, including PD-L1 expression. As of 18 February 2021, a 40% reduction in risk of death was observed in the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm (HR = 0.603 (95% CI: 0.364-0.997)). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (89.0 versus 89.5%), AEs leading to discontinuation of toripalimab/placebo (7.5 versus 4.9%) and fatal AEs (2.7 versus 2.8%) was similar between the two arms; however, immune-related AEs (39.7 versus 18.9%) and grade ≥3 infusion reactions (7.5 versus 0.7%) were more frequent in the toripalimab arm. In conclusion, the addition of toripalimab to GP chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with RM-NPC provided superior PFS compared to GP alone, and with a manageable safety profile.

Systematic Review of PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors in Oncology: From Personalized Medicine to Public Health.

BACKGROUND: To review and summarize all U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-ligand 1 blocking antibodies (collectively referred to as PD-[L]1 inhibitors) over a 6-year period and corresponding companion/complementary diagnostic assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To determine the indications and pivotal trials eligible for inclusion, approval letters and package inserts available on Drugs@FDA were evaluated for approved PD-[L]1 inhibitors to identify all new indications granted from the first approval of a PD-[L]1 inhibitor on September 4, 2014, through September 3, 2020. The corresponding FDA drug and device reviews from the marketing applications for the approved indications were identified through FDA internal records. Two reviewers independently extracted information for the endpoints, efficacy data, basis for approval, type of regulatory approval, and corresponding in vitro diagnostic device test. The results were organized by organ system and tumor type. RESULTS: Of 70 Biologic Licensing Application or supplement approvals that resulted in new indications, 32 (46%) were granted based on response rate (ORR) and durability of response, 26 (37%) on overall survival, 9 (13%) on progression-free survival, 2 (3%) on recurrence-free survival, and 1 (1%) on complete response rate. Most ORR-based approvals were granted under the accelerated approval provisions and were supported with prolonged duration of response. Overall, 21% of approvals were granted with a companion diagnostic. Efficacy results according to tumor type are discussed. CONCLUSION: PD-[L]1 inhibitors are an effective anticancer therapy in a subset of patients. This class of drugs has provided new treatment options for patients with unmet need across a wide variety of cancer types. Yet, the modest response rates in several tumor types signal a lack of understanding of the biology of these diseases. Further preclinical and clinical investigation may be required to identify a more appropriate patient population, particularly as drug development continues and additional treatment alternatives become available. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The number of PD-[L]1 inhibitors in drug development and the associated companion and complementary diagnostics have led to regulatory challenges and questions regarding generalizability of trial results. The interchangeability of PD-L1 immunohistochemical assays between PD-1/PD-L1 drugs is unclear. Furthermore, robust responses in some patients with low levels of PD-L1 expression have limited the use of PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker across all cancers, particularly in the setting of diseases with few alternative treatment options. This review summarizes the biomarker thresholds and assays approved as complementary and companion diagnostics and provides regulatory perspective on the role of biomarkers in oncology drug development.

Best Practice Recommendations for Optimizing Care in Structural Heart Programs: Planning Efficient and Resource Leveraging Systems (PEARLS).

The COVID19 pandemic brought unprecedented disruption to healthcare. Staggering morbidity, mortality, and economic losses prompted the review and refinement of care for structural heart disease (SHD). To mitigate negative impacts in the face of crisis or capacity constraints, this paper offers best practice recommendations for Planning Efficient and Resource Leveraging Systems (PEARLS) in structural heart programs. A systematic assessment is recommended for hospital capacity, Heart Team roles and functions, and patient and procedural risks associated with increased resource utilization. Strategies, tactics, and pathways are provided for the delivery of patient-centered, efficient and resource-leveraging care from referral to follow-up. Through the optimal use of capacity and resources, paired with dynamic triage, forecasting, and surveillance, Heart Teams may aspire to plan and implement an optimized system of care for SHD. Abbreviations: AS: aortic stenosis; ASD: atrioseptal defect; COVID19: Coronavirus disease 19; LAAO: left atrial appendage occlusion; MI: myocardial infarction; MR: mitral regurgitation; PFO: patent foramen ovale; PVL: paravalvular leak; SHD: structural heart disease; SAVR: surgical aortic valve replacement; SDM: shared decision-making; TAVR: transcatheter aortic valve replacement; TMVr: transcatheter mitral valve repair; TMVR: transcatheter mitral valve replacement; TEE: transesophageal echocardiography; TTE: transthoracic echocardiography.

FDA Supplemental Approval Summary: Lenvatinib for the Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

On August 16, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved lenvatinib (Lenvima, Eisai Inc.) for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Approval was based on an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (REFLECT; NCT01761266) conducted in 954 patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable HCC. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive lenvatinib (12 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight ≥60 kg and 8 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight <60 kg) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until radiological disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib was noninferior but not statistically superior to sorafenib for overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, [HR] 0.92; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.79-1.06), with median OS of 13.6 and 12.3 months in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. REFLECT also demonstrated statistically significant improvements in investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77]; p < 0.001), corresponding to median PFS of 7.4 and 3.7 months and overall response rate of 24.1% vs 9.2% per modified RECIST for HCC (mRECIST) in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Consistent results were observed by an independent review facility per RECISTv1.1 and per mRECIST. The most common adverse reactions observed in the lenvatinib-treated patients (≥20%) in decreasing frequency were hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite, arthralgia/myalgia, decreased weight, abdominal pain, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, dysphonia, hemorrhagic events, hypothyroidism, and nausea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's review of data from a single trial, REFLECT, that supported the approval of lenvatinib, as a single agent, for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). REFLECT was an open-label, noninferiority trial that randomized 954 patients with HCC who were ineligible for liver-directed therapy with no prior systemic therapy for HCC to lenvatinib or sorafenib. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib-treated patients had similar survival, more responses, and longer time to progression than those receiving sorafenib. Serious side effects were more common among lenvatinib-treated patients. Lenvatinib is an effective treatment for patients with previously untreated HCC.

FDA Oncology Center of Excellence Project Renewal: Engaging the Oncology Community to Update Product Labeling for Older Oncology Drugs.

The FDA conducts independent reviews of scientific data obtained with investigational drug products to ensure that they are safe and effective. As a result of this process, FDA-approved product labeling is generated that is considered one of the most trusted sources of information for use of an approved drug. But FDA approval is only the beginning of the life cycle of a new drug; the first oncology drugs now have more than 7 decades of clinical experience in the postmarketing setting. Due, in part, to lack of incentives, some companies may not seek inclusion of new data, other than new safety information, in FDA-approved product labeling. Ensuring that product labeling provides adequate directions for use is important for all drugs, including older therapies that may form the backbone of many standard combination regimens for pediatric and adult cancers. Project Renewal is an FDA Oncology Center of Excellence pilot program that leverages expertise from the clinical and scientific oncology communities to review published literature and generate a drug-specific product report summarizing data that may support updates to FDA-approved product labeling. This article provides a broad overview of Project Renewal's collaborative pilot process for identifying and assessing literature supporting potential labeling updates, while engaging the oncology community to increase awareness of FDA's evidentiary standards and deliberative processes used when considering the addition of new indications and dosing regimens to product labeling.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Melanoma: A U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Melanoma Research Alliance Public Workshop.

Tremendous progress has been made in treating patients with metastatic melanoma over the past decade. In that timeframe, the FDA has approved 12 novel treatments for patients with advanced unresectable melanoma, comprising both kinase-targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and five treatments for adjuvant (postoperative) use in patients with high-risk resectable stage III melanoma. It is not known whether outcomes can be further improved by administering kinase inhibitors or ICI in the neoadjuvant (presurgical) setting in patients with high-risk resectable melanomas. Noting research community interest in exploring the neoadjuvant approach for treating melanoma and recognizing that early harmonization of methodologies may expedite the development of therapeutics in this space, the FDA and Melanoma Research Alliance convened a public workshop on November 6, 2019, in National Harbor, Maryland, to discuss key issues. The workshop consisted of 23 faculty and included more than 250 live participants. Topics discussed included opportunities for advancing novel endpoints for regulatory purposes as well as translational research, clinical trial design considerations, and strategies for optimizing patient selection while mitigating risk.

Safety of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the COVID-19 era.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy and feasibility of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR. BACKGROUND: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we created a same-day discharge (SDD) pathway after conscious sedation, transfemoral (minimalist) TAVR to help minimize risk of viral transmission and conserve hospital resources. Studies support that next-day discharge (NDD) for carefully selected patients following minimalist TAVR is safe and feasible. There is a paucity of data regarding the safety of SDD after TAVR. METHODS: In-hospital and 30 day outcomes of consecutive patients meeting pre-specified criteria for SDD after minimalist TAVR at our institution between March and July of 2020 were reviewed. Outcomes were compared to a NDD cohort from July 2018 through July 2020 that would have met SDD criteria. Primary endpoints were mortality, delayed pacemaker placement, stroke and cardiovascular readmission at 30 days. RESULTS: Twenty nine patients were discharged via the SDD pathway after TAVR. 128 prior NDD patients were identified who met all criteria for SDD. The STS scores were similar between the two groups (SDD 2.6% ±1.5 vs. NDD 2.3% ± 1.2). There were no deaths at 30 days in either group. There was no significant difference in delayed pacemaker placement (SDD 0% vs. NDD 0.8%, p > .99) or cardiovascular readmission (SDD 0% vs. NDD 5.5%, p = .35) at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Same day discharge following uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR in selected patients appears to be safe, achieving similar 30 day outcomes as a cohort of next day discharge patients.

FDA Approval Summary: Entrectinib for the Treatment of NTRK gene Fusion Solid Tumors.

The FDA-approved entrectinib on August 15, 2019, for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients 12 years of age and older with solid tumors that have a neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusion without a known acquired resistance mutation, are metastatic or where surgical resection is likely to result in severe morbidity, and have progressed following treatment or have no satisfactory alternative therapy. Approval was based on demonstration of a durable overall response rate of 57% (95% confidence interval: 43-71), including a complete response rate of 7%, among 54 entrectinib-treated patients with 10 different tumor types harboring an NTRK fusion enrolled in one of three single-arm clinical trials. The durations of response ranged from 2.8 months to 26.0+ months; 68% of responses lasted ≥ 6 months. The most serious toxicities of entrectinib are congestive heart failure, central nervous system effects, skeletal fractures, hepatotoxicity, hyperuricemia, QT prolongation, and vision disorders. Adverse reactions were manageable through dose interruptions (46%), dose reductions (29%), or discontinuation of entrectinib (9%). This is the third approval of a cancer drug for treatment of a tissue agnostic, biomarker-defined cancer.

Immune Response Evaluation and Treatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Beyond Clinical Progression: Response Assessments for Cancer Immunotherapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides a comprehensive assessment of recent literature reports describing atypical response patterns observed with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), modifications to response evaluation criteria for ICIs, and treatment beyond progression in clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Certain response patterns such as durable response, pseudoprogression, hyperprogression, and dissociated responses can be seen with ICI treatment. These patterns carry differing prognoses and are associated with varied factors. There are multiple modifications of standard Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) that have been proposed to better characterize immunotherapy response; however, standard RECIST1.1 remains most commonly used in clinical trials. Treatment beyond progression varies in frequency and benefit depending on assessment criteria and cancer type. Future research incorporating modified imaging criteria and biomarker assessments may serve to clarify who will benefit most from treatment beyond progression.

FDA Accelerated Approval of Pembrolizumab for Recurrent Locally Advanced or Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma.

On December 19, 2018, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA, Merck & Co. Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) for adult and pediatric patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). Approval was based on Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network protocol 9, also known as KEYNOTE-017 (NCT02267603), a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label trial that enrolled 50 patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic MCC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease. The major efficacy outcome measures were overall response rate (ORR) and response duration assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1. The ORR was 56% (95% confidence interval: 41, 70) with a complete response rate of 24%. The median response duration was not reached. Among the 28 patients with responses, 96% had response durations of greater than 6 months and 54% had response durations of greater than 12 months. The most common adverse reactions of pembrolizumab reported in at least 20% of patients who received pembrolizumab as a single agent were fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, decreased appetite, pruritus, diarrhea, nausea, rash, pyrexia, cough, dyspnea, constipation, pain, and abdominal pain. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the basis for the Food and Drug Administration's accelerated approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, including efficacy and safety information. This approval provides patients and physicians with an additional treatment option for this aggressive and life-threatening carcinoma.

Evaluation of Serious Postmarket Safety Signals Within 2 Years of FDA Approval for New Cancer Drugs.

BACKGROUND: We examined how often new serious safety signals were identified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the first 2 years after approval for new molecular entities (NMEs) for treatment of cancer that required specific regulatory actions described here. METHODS: We identified, for all NMEs approved for treatment of cancer or malignant hematology indications between 2010 and 2016, substantial safety-related changes within the first 2 years after approval, which included a new Boxed Warning or Warning and Precaution; requirement for (or modification of existing) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS); and withdrawal from the market because of safety concerns. RESULTS: Fifty-five NMEs were approved between 2010 and 2016: 32 (58%) under regular approval (RA) and 23 (42%) under accelerated approval (AA). Of these 55 NMEs, 9 (16%) had substantial safety-related changes after approval. Across all 55 NMEs, one was temporarily withdrawn from the market for safety reasons (1.8%); one (1.8%) required a new REMS; nine required labeling revisions-new Boxed Warnings were required for two NMEs (3.6%), and new Warnings and Precautions subsections were required for eight (14.6%). One drug (ponatinib) was responsible for several of the substantial safety-related changes (withdrawal, REMS, Boxed Warnings). One of 32 NMEs approved under RA required a new Warning and Precaution, whereas 7 of 23 NMEs approved under AA had substantial safety-related changes in the first 2 years after approval. CONCLUSION: Based on our analysis we conclude that although there was a greater incidence of substantial safety-related changes to AA drugs versus RA drugs, the majority of these were changes to the Warnings and Precautions and did not substantially alter the benefit-risk profile of the drug. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The majority of new cancer drugs (84%) approved in the U.S. do not have new substantial safety information being added to the label within the first 2 years of approval. Unprecedented efficacy seen in contemporary cancer drug development has led to early availability of effective cancer therapies based on large effects in smaller populations. More limited premarket safety data require diligent postmarketing safety surveillance as we continue to learn and update drug labeling throughout the product lifecycle.